Three Class hockey

[yesiplayedhockey]

What I'd like to see cut down or eliminated is the amount of recruiting that goes on at the private schools (and most of the larger AA schools)Or as some people call it "open enrollment"...

Would going to a 3 class system help cut this down?

Does anyone know in football, can a 6A school play say a 4A school during the season? If not, would it make any sense to limit (or stop completely) AA schools from playing A schools?

I really enjoy the state hockey tournament except during those years were over half the field is private schools. And yes I do miss the Roseau versus Edina type championship game you'd often see in the 70's and 80's. I am a huge fan of a final four type format but maybe that just won't work in our HS hockey world

[GoldyGopher]

I'm acutally quite skeptical of the "just move Hermantown and Breck up and it solves everything" argument. It would be nice if one little tweak would make everything great, but talent levels aren't even over time, and the class system creates incentives for teams to do certain things to strengthen their positions. It may work temporarily, and in 7A because of the dynamics of that section, but, over time, the cream will rise to the top.

I don't think it was coincidental that SPA suddenly became good right after STA went to AA. Maybe they're next, maybe it's Minnehaha instead; if Breck goes up, maybe Blake or Providence Academy is next. And it's not just private schools, as the Hermantown experience shows. Clear the field ahead of them, and Mahtomedi probably builds on its existing depth and starts to pull in some transfers, and before long we're having this same argument all over again. It doesn't take a genius for a parent (or an enterprising coach/AD) to see the opportunity. These are the sorts of incentives you get in a multi-class system.

Lee pointed out earlier today that there's only one point difference between the top 11 AA teams in PS2. But even if we throw out Hermantown, there's a much larger gap between #1 and #11 in Class A. That larger gap in Class A is pretty consistent, year in and year out. Talent is not evenly distributed, so the advantage a team gets from having one D-I player (or a group of high-quality high school players) can create instant separation. There's a big concentration at the bottom (the many teams out there with no high end talent), and there are diminishing returns as you stockpile more and more. (The benefit a team draws from having a 10th D-I player is much smaller than the benefit derived from the second.)

I think that will be true no matter how many classes there are. Not only that, with more classes, the bar for domination is lower. In a three class system, you might only need 2 or 3 D-III players yearly in the lowest class to become a consistent power. Again, not hard for a team or two to set up a little pipeline and take control.

I also don't think banning opt-ups would solve anything. This is because most, if not all, of the opt-ups would end up in the Class A sections that are strong already (2A, 4A, 7A, 8A). If you think Breck or Mahtomedi against New Ulm sounds bad, wait until the 3A rep gets Hill-Murray or Grand Rapids in the first round...

For the most part, I'm fine with the system we have now. Now that 1AA is consistently fielding very competitive teams, the only bad first round AA State match-ups come when some Cinderella crashes the party, which is fun for different reasons. Class A has some yawners in the first round based on geography; some mild tweaks might help this, though I'm also a big believer in having it be an actual "state" tournament that lets teams from all over the state have a chance. A one-class Tourney has a certain allure, but I'm a realist, and I also think A hockey has done important work in expanding the game in certain parts of the state. But any system has its flaws, and the STA/Hermantown problem is baked into the one we have.

(I also may be in the minority here, but at this point, I don't think Breck should move up, at least not if we're applying a consistent standard. The talent level they put out there just isn't the same as the D-I factories that STA and now Hermantown have created. They get a decent concentration of consistently good players, but rarely do they have more than 2 or 3 D-I players, and on the one or two teams they've had that do, they tend to be a bunch of kids who go to high academic East Coast D-I schools, not the consistent NCAA powers who get the high-end recruits. *At this point,* I don't see that imbalance as damaging or making a mockery of section playoffs/the first two rounds at State, like STA was a few years back.)

I'm fine with the idea that say a 3A school goes to the X and gets crushed. It's going to happen with Hermantown or without them. The question I'd have to ask is who is Hermantown moving up to class AA not going to benefit? They beat Rapids and DM this year. Needless to say they would still be a favorite to get to state in AA I'd think? It's long overdue and I don't see how a case could be made for them to stay in class A.

STA moving up and SPA gaining steam as a strong class A team is the system working well I would say. The point would be to have some of these teams with continued success moving up so the next team in line can keep the cycle going. Eventually you'll end up with a lot more AA teams/competition and a more balanced class A.

[Hermit]

It seems to me like the problem could be fixed if Class AA schools would quit scheduling so many games with the top Class A schools. What do Class AA schools get out of these games?

Therefore if a Class A school wants to challenge themselves, they need to opt up to do so as opposed to just testing the AA waters in the regular season knowing they can always fall back on getting to experience the State Tournament if things don't work out for them at AA

[BlueLineSpecial]

It seems to me like the problem could be fixed if Class AA schools would quit scheduling so many games with the top Class A schools. What do Class AA schools get out of these games?

Therefore if a Class A school wants to challenge themselves, they need to opt up to do so as opposed to just testing the AA waters in the regular season knowing they can always fall back on getting to experience the State Tournament if things don't work out for them at AA

Conference alignments are probably more the issue with AA teams playing A teams than individual team scheduling. There are a lot of conferences out there that have a mix of both, which I believe requires them to play a certain number of games.

[Zamman]

32 in AAA
48 in AA
80 in A

Class A elsewhere not in X except championship which would be televised.

Class AA in 8 sections - winner to state on Wed Fri & Sat

Class AAA 32 seeded and play to games then final 8 to state

Never work, girls have to play at the X so all teams would have to play there. The tournament would go down and not be looked at as the premier tournament in the country. Leave it as is, all teams will get their chance it is cyclical.

[Slammer]

One class, 32 team bracket at mariucci, 8 teams at X,

One state champion.

This would get televised nationally.

[elliott70]

This is the way I would run a 3 class system.

Start with a reputable non-biased (computerized) ranking system at some pre-designated date (I am using today).

Take the top 10 regardless of AA or A then the next 14 AA schools.

Playoff game #1 versus winner of team #9 and team #24 and so on.
So this is the number 1 seed at state and they play the number 8 seed which is #8 rank versus winner of #16 & #17.

This would be the 2017 Class AAA tournament

#1 seed game
winner of Minnetonka - Bemidji against Hermantown

#8 seed game
winner of Lakeville South - St Mike against Duluth East

#4 seed game
winner of Elk River - Blaine against Holy Family

#5 seed game
winner of Lakeville North - Wayzata against Hill

#2 seed game
winner of Stillwater - Duluth Marshall

#7 seed game
winner of Moorhead - White Bear Lake against St T Academy

#3 seed game
winner of Grand Rapids - Cretin against Duluth East

#6 seed game
winner of Maple Grove - Burnsville against Edina


Now I just did this quick and used page stat AND it is fictitious so don't get all excited. It is just to show how something like this might work.

The next 64 are Double AA, the remaining 62 or so are Single A and play elsewhere - such as St Cloud - Duluth - Bemidji for the Class A championship.

The number 1 rank is in AAA regardless.
Any single A school can elect (at the start of the year) to be considered for AAA (if in top 24).


This made lunch hour a bit more interesting/

[elliott70]

The top 20 AA schools would be
StPAcademy
Breck
Delano
Roseau
Prior Lake

Brainerd
Eastview
Cloquet
EGF
Mahtomedi

St Cloud Cathedral
Buffalo
Woodbury
Tartan
St Louis Park

Orono
Rosemount
Andover
St Paul Johnson
St Cloud

last AA team would be Hastings

[elliott70]

The top 10 in Class 'A' would be

So St Paul
Rochester JM
Red Wing
Mankato East
River Lakes
Litchfield
LOW
Bloomington Kennedy
Pine City
North Shore

[HShockeywatcher]

I also don't think banning opt-ups would solve anything. This is because most, if not all, of the opt-ups would end up in the Class A sections that are strong already (2A, 4A, 7A, 8A). If you think Breck or Mahtomedi against New Ulm sounds bad, wait until the 3A rep gets Hill-Murray or Grand Rapids in the first round...

The thing I think is often overlooked is what this would do to the fields and possibly where kids would end up going to school. Without opt ups you end up with two good tournaments instead of the varsity and jv tournaments. Knowing there wasn't stigma about the class you are in seems like it could affect where children choose schools when hockey is a factor.

Since there is precedent for a sport doing things differently, what if hockey were to determine classes in a different manner? I don't think I have the perfect formula, but we see big schools with small numbers and small schools with big numbers; wouldn't it make sense if classes resembled the program size and not school size?

I'm not convinced that it would make the stigma disappear. Maybe in a vacuum, yeah, but reputations linger, and while the later rounds might get a little better, geography suggests we'd still have those first round blowouts. And while it's hard to say what it would do to player movement, I doubt the end result would be particularly happy for those smaller Greater MN Class A schools, who, (if I'm reading this thread right) are the ones who find the current arrangement most unfair.

I do think there are merits to exploring program size as the determining factor. There are issues that would need to be sorted out, like what you do with privates or with youth associations that don't match HS lines, but it makes a lot of sense.

The other thing mentioned in this thread that I support fully: getting rid of conferences, which are even more useless now that they don't exist for football reasons. We discussed this on the podcast a few weeks ago, but maybe this can be the start of something. And yes, for section seeding's sake, make everyone in a section together play at least once a year.

As far as the smaller schools being upset, this is, again, ultimately is what I mean as far as people deciding what they are looking for. Are you looking for a state tournament where bad teams get to make it simply because they are from a geographic area, or are we actually looking for good teams to be at the state tournament. I remember discussing this some years ago and I brought up multiple examples in other sports and other states where the best team in the state (even sometimes in the country) isn't in the top class in their state. There's also the possibility of changing the postseason so you have to make the postseason. Not only would that "fix" the blowout issue, but it could make the postseason shorter and maybe add a game to schedules.

From the way I look at things, using program size would be exactly how we'd fix "the private school issue." I can't speak for every program, but I know that many private programs (like public schools) are big and have kids playing bantams longer than in other programs or not making the cut and playing jr gold or simply not playing anymore. So, if your program is "big enough," there would be some way to count those kids.
This could end discussion about co-ops and private schools and have every program treated the same way. It actually would likely have some "small schools" end up in AA anyway.

It seems to me like the problem could be fixed if Class AA schools would quit scheduling so many games with the top Class A schools. What do Class AA schools get out of these games?

Therefore if a Class A school wants to challenge themselves, they need to opt up to do so as opposed to just testing the AA waters in the regular season knowing they can always fall back on getting to experience the State Tournament if things don't work out for them at AA

This implies that class=ability, which we know isn't the case. It would also hurt many non-metro programs and they'd probably end up with a significantly shorter schedule. It would similarly hurt many AA programs.

[HShockeywatcher]

This is the way I would run a 3 class system.

Start with a reputable non-biased (computerized) ranking system at some pre-designated date (I am using today).

Take the top 10 regardless of AA or A then the next 14 AA schools.

Playoff game #1 versus winner of team #9 and team #24 and so on.
So this is the number 1 seed at state and they play the number 8 seed which is #8 rank versus winner of #16 & #17.

So, you're saying everyone would be in the same pool and the tournament you play in is based on how well you do in a given year?

[elliott70]

This is the way I would run a 3 class system.

Start with a reputable non-biased (computerized) ranking system at some pre-designated date (I am using today).

Take the top 10 regardless of AA or A then the next 14 AA schools.

Playoff game #1 versus winner of team #9 and team #24 and so on.
So this is the number 1 seed at state and they play the number 8 seed which is #8 rank versus winner of #16 & #17.

So, you're saying everyone would be in the same pool and the tournament you play in is based on how well you do in a given year?

Yes, except small schools (current single A) would not have to play in AAA unless electing to do so (unless they were #1).
Not sure it is a good idea, bad idea or something else; but it gave me something to do while eating my sandwich.

[edgeless2]

Great discussion! Buyer beware. The only state that approaches our numbers is Michigan. They have a 3 class system and they are lucky to pull 10k fans to all three chip games combined. It's so watered down that they have huge issues losing talent to Tier 1 Midget hockey. Not saying that is what would happen here but...it could. I guess I'm in the "if it ain't broke don't fix it" crowd. We have a really nice system here not perfect but nothing is. This link is how they do rankings.

http://www.mihshockeyhub.com/

So essentially the best team in the state is ranked by an old school NCAA football model or Super 10 is what they call it.

[Hermit]

The thing I think is often overlooked is what this would do to the fields and possibly where kids would end up going to school. Without opt ups you end up with two good tournaments instead of the varsity and jv tournaments. Knowing there wasn't stigma about the class you are in seems like it could affect where children choose schools when hockey is a factor.

Since there is precedent for a sport doing things differently, what if hockey were to determine classes in a different manner? I don't think I have the perfect formula, but we see big schools with small numbers and small schools with big numbers; wouldn't it make sense if classes resembled the program size and not school size?

I'm not convinced that it would make the stigma disappear. Maybe in a vacuum, yeah, but reputations linger, and while the later rounds might get a little better, geography suggests we'd still have those first round blowouts. And while it's hard to say what it would do to player movement, I doubt the end result would be particularly happy for those smaller Greater MN Class A schools, who, (if I'm reading this thread right) are the ones who find the current arrangement most unfair.

I do think there are merits to exploring program size as the determining factor. There are issues that would need to be sorted out, like what you do with privates or with youth associations that don't match HS lines, but it makes a lot of sense.

The other thing mentioned in this thread that I support fully: getting rid of conferences, which are even more useless now that they don't exist for football reasons. We discussed this on the podcast a few weeks ago, but maybe this can be the start of something. And yes, for section seeding's sake, make everyone in a section together play at least once a year.

As far as the smaller schools being upset, this is, again, ultimately is what I mean as far as people deciding what they are looking for. Are you looking for a state tournament where bad teams get to make it simply because they are from a geographic area, or are we actually looking for good teams to be at the state tournament. I remember discussing this some years ago and I brought up multiple examples in other sports and other states where the best team in the state (even sometimes in the country) isn't in the top class in their state. There's also the possibility of changing the postseason so you have to make the postseason. Not only would that "fix" the blowout issue, but it could make the postseason shorter and maybe add a game to schedules.

From the way I look at things, using program size would be exactly how we'd fix "the private school issue." I can't speak for every program, but I know that many private programs (like public schools) are big and have kids playing bantams longer than in other programs or not making the cut and playing jr gold or simply not playing anymore. So, if your program is "big enough," there would be some way to count those kids.
This could end discussion about co-ops and private schools and have every program treated the same way. It actually would likely have some "small schools" end up in AA anyway.

It seems to me like the problem could be fixed if Class AA schools would quit scheduling so many games with the top Class A schools. What do Class AA schools get out of these games?

Therefore if a Class A school wants to challenge themselves, they need to opt up to do so as opposed to just testing the AA waters in the regular season knowing they can always fall back on getting to experience the State Tournament if things don't work out for them at AA

This implies that class=ability, which we know isn't the case. It would also hurt many non-metro programs and they'd probably end up with a significantly shorter schedule. It would similarly hurt many AA programs.

I don't see this hurting any program if everyone continues to play their conference schedule regardless of A or AA and rounds out most of the regular season playing section opponents and the occassional non-conference games with new opponents you want to play during the regular season or at Christmas Tournaments. Therefore during the regular season you would play teams near you geographically (reinforce rivalries, cheaper for schools, probably some other benefits)

This would result in the first matchup of the regular season for many of the top teams to only be possible at the State Tournament which would add excitement I believe.

The only team this would really change things for is Hermantown. Instead of them getting to play Class A hockey but getting on the schedule for 9 non-conference games against AA schools, they would have to replace games with Wayzata, Lakeville South, WBL, and STMA with games against Ely, North Shore, I-Falls, and others from their section. If the Class A team is not happy with that change, they can opt up to AA and that will open up the opportunity for many more AA games for teams close by geographically.

[gitter]

The top 10 in Class 'A' would be

So St Paul
Rochester JM
Red Wing
Mankato East
River Lakes
Litchfield
LOW
Bloomington Kennedy
Pine City
North Shore

No offense to any of these programs, but this would be un-watchable. And why it won't work. Attendance would be parents and some students who are excited to get out of school for no other reason than to be out of school. And i'm sure it would be argued to play at the X, which would sink more cost, without any reward.

But....I do give you credit Elliott for starting a thread that has more than 8 replies...pretty sparse around here these days....

[elliott70]

The top 10 in Class 'A' would be

So St Paul
Rochester JM
Red Wing
Mankato East
River Lakes
Litchfield
LOW
Bloomington Kennedy
Pine City
North Shore

No offense to any of these programs, but this would be un-watchable. And why it won't work. Attendance would be parents and some students who are excited to get out of school for no other reason than to be out of school. And i'm sure it would be argued to play at the X, which would sink more cost, without any reward.

You may be right, but then again...
River Lakes
Litchfield
LOW
Pine City
and Silver Bay- Two Harbors would probably show up with 500 to 1000 people.
Fill up the Sanford Center in Bemidji and create a lot of excitement for their communities and where ever the event took place.

AAA would still have their schools and the hockey fanatics.

And AA would be the new single A tourney with the lower bowl full for those schools that hockey is the big thing and partial for the rest....

But unless MSHSL decides to change it is all just what ifs...

But if MSHSL decides to make changes wouldn't it be nice if a bunch of us could respond to them with ideas???

[goldy313]

6A football teams only play 6A football teams, after that they mix it up quite a bit. Most games I officiate seem to involve teams from different classes.

Conferences serve a purpose, a main one is making sure all your teams in every sport you offer get games. Hockey is different in that, compared to other sports, relatively few schools play and in some cases hockey conferences aren't aligned with other sports......They also allow for rivalries, something that has been kind of lost in football with district scheduling, I know schools who have had their athletic budgets take a huge hit when schools that played against each other for 80 years in the same conference found themselves in different districts.

[hockeydad]

Using a rating system (QRF, Pagestat or whatever) at the end of the regular season, determine the top 32 teams regardless of enrollment. That is Class AAA

Next 56 teams by enrollment (counting all enrollment in all schools in a coop) are AA - divide them regionally and send eight to state. No opt-ups or opt-downs. Roseau, if they don't make AAA field, is A, Minneapolis or Becker Big Lake would be AA

Rest of field (63 teams) are A - again, divide them regionally.

[MrBoDangles]

Never!!! They can't even get two levels right.. They move a middle of the pack 8AA (with 2000 students) team down to 5A and now they're the perennial favorite in the section..

How babied is this MAML program? Somebody recently pointed out that they dropped their enrollment to 1200 on the hockey hub, when it already said 1900 something (combined) a couple weeks ago.. You can look at the numbers from any other year and it's correct with the coop. Even the Hub is corrupted now... @hub?

[HShockeywatcher]

I don't see this hurting any program if everyone continues to play their conference schedule regardless of A or AA and rounds out most of the regular season playing section opponents and the occassional non-conference games with new opponents you want to play during the regular season or at Christmas Tournaments. Therefore during the regular season you would play teams near you geographically (reinforce rivalries, cheaper for schools, probably some other benefits)

This would result in the first matchup of the regular season for many of the top teams to only be possible at the State Tournament which would add excitement I believe.

The only team this would really change things for is Hermantown. Instead of them getting to play Class A hockey but getting on the schedule for 9 non-conference games against AA schools, they would have to replace games with Wayzata, Lakeville South, WBL, and STMA with games against Ely, North Shore, I-Falls, and others from their section. If the Class A team is not happy with that change, they can opt up to AA and that will open up the opportunity for many more AA games for teams close by geographically.

Roseau plays 8 Class A teams, as well as some non-MN teams. Bemidji 10, Cloquet 5, and Rapids 6, just to name a few off hand. This would hurt teams financially. What about non-MN teams? Saying they can't play certain teams likely isn't happening; seems too illogical.

I'd definitely love to see requirements on more intersection play, which getting rid of conferences could accomplish, and some way to help teams play more teams around the state, which fans would love, but not letting teams play other teams based on class is silly.

[GoldyGopher]

Never!!! They can't even get two levels right.. They move a middle of the pack 8AA (with 2000 students) team down to 5A and now they're the perennial favorite in the section..

How babied is this MAML program? Somebody recently pointed out that they dropped their enrollment to 1200 on the hockey hub, when it already said 1900 something (combined) a couple weeks ago.. You can look at the numbers from any other year and it's correct with the coop. Even the Hub is corrupted now... @hub?

Lol here we go again. For the sake of this threads topic I won't argue.

I like the thread Elliot, way to stir the pot and get some chatter going.

[Green and White Fan]

Any changes that would ever be made, have to be made on the basis of what is best for the kids. We have to remember these are school sponsored extra-curricular activities for the kids and not necessarily there to appease our wants and what hockey used to be. Take Roseau for example, the time is coming where we will need to take a good look at what is best for our kids, A or AA? Everybody loves the Roseau/Edina matchup, but is that what is best for Roseau hockey as hockey has evolved? Is a shot at state once every 10-15 years now good enough? What about the players playing the other 9-14 years? Or do we make a move to class A, save a lot of travel, renew rivalries with our neighbors and give our kids a chance to go to state more than once a decade? We still wouldn't go to state every year as EGF, TRF and Warroad for sure will be obstacles every year. We haven't had a youth team at the state tournament since we started playing AA youth hockey. Losing is becoming more common place and even excepted. Is this what is best for the kids? The hockey landscape has changed, out state declining enrollment is effecting numbers and each program plus the high school league will need to make decisions on what is best for the kids.

[elliott70]

Any changes that would ever be made, have to be made on the basis of what is best for the kids. We have to remember these are school sponsored extra-curricular activities for the kids and not necessarily there to appease our wants and what hockey used to be. Take Roseau for example, the time is coming where we will need to take a good look at what is best for our kids, A or AA? Everybody loves the Roseau/Edina matchup, but is that what is best for Roseau hockey as hockey has evolved? Is a shot at state once every 10-15 years now good enough? What about the players playing the other 9-14 years? Or do we make a move to class A, save a lot of travel, renew rivalries with our neighbors and give our kids a chance to go to state more than once a decade? We still wouldn't go to state every year as EGF, TRF and Warroad for sure will be obstacles every year. We haven't had a youth team at the state tournament since we started playing AA youth hockey. Losing is becoming more common place and even excepted. Is this what is best for the kids? The hockey landscape has changed, out state declining enrollment is effecting numbers and each program plus the high school league will need to make decisions on what is best for the kids.

Yes, I understand your dilemma.

But that is what brought this on...
What is good for the kids in Forest Lake, Rochester, Tartan,; all those AA schools that for the most part never participate at state or even a section final. If those schools that are large and fed from quality youth programs are pulled out of AA into some 'super' league; will it give the opportunity for some good but not great teams to be at state. Will it give some of those single A schools that never get to the section finals a shot?

I am a one class guy, but realize that times have changed.

But again, any change will come from MSHSL. I just want to let them know how I feel about the next change they make (if and when).

But it has been fun just monkeying around with ideas.

[alcloseshaver]

Of note the MSHSL general assembly did vote today to change the way they count coops. 100% of the largest school and 50% of the others.

[tezer13]

I haven't had the time to follow all of this, but here is my take -------NO-------- I think going to 2 classes was a bad idea in the first place. I would scrap the 2 class system and just expand the tournament to 16 teams.